CV32

The British experience with the V-1 and V-2 has useful lessons, though I think the sheer scale and the context of their use makes for a difficult comparison, imho.

The cold waters of the North Atlantic are a five minute stroll from my office. The salt here is tangible, and depending on which way the wind is blowing, some days you can taste it in the air. The joys of living on an island. I'm always impressed by the potential longevity of motor vehicles in less maritime environments. They just do not last around here, typically corroding to death long before the mileage takes a toll.

While one can probably rest assured that the USA would 'win' any military confrontation with either Venezuela, Iran or both, I think maybe he's missing a bit of the point when it comes to ballistic missiles. Iranian missiles in Venezuela would not have to be reliable, accurate, or carry WMD in order to be threatening or even dangerous. Any breaking news that ballistic missiles have been launched against the United States carries with it a threshold of damage all its own.

Thanks for the votes of confidence, guys. When this place was launched a little over six years ago, the objective was to provide a place where folks could discuss and share Harpoon, things related to it and the like. There would be room for healthy, respectful debate but no room for grandstanding or displays of ostentatious or partisan 'politicking' for one version of the game over another. Nor is there room for any pretense of claiming to be the "one and only" place for Harpoon. We'll continue to try and meet the needs of those who play and enjoy the Harpoon series - and wargames in general! - for as long as we're able.

Of course there are emerging ways of turning just about any helicopter (not just a dedicated attack helo) into a useful anti-swarm weapon system. (Youtube vid)

Worth bearing in mind that these are British Army Apaches. (And, yes, I expect corrosion would be an issue with any extended deployment).

From Defense Aerospace [excerpt]

I don't advocate for any particular alternative, though I do see some merit in the RAAF's approach of buying an interim warplane (in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, incl an EA-18G-like option) and adopting a "wait and see" approach for JSF, i.e. waiting for the design to mature, and seeing if the cost and delay problems are resolved.

Thanks, sounds like it could be a fair ways down the road.

From the Spring 2011 issue of US Naval War College Review: Hiding in Plain Sight: the US Navy and Dispersed Operations under EMCON, 1956-72 (PDF) This is a subject to which I think most if not all Harpoon players can relate: trying to hide your carrier group (or for that matter, any naval formation) from the enemy.

A lengthy discussion on the topic, from the Spring 2011 issue of US Naval War College Review: The Development of the Angled Deck Aircraft Carrier (PDF)

From the Summer 2011 issue of US Naval War College Review: A New Carrier Race? (PDF) A lengthy discussion about the JMSDF's new DDH Hyuga.

From the Summer 2011 issue of US Naval War College Review: PLA Doctrine and the Employment of Sea Based Airpower (PDF)

From the Summer 2011 US Naval War College Review Why Wargaming Works (PDF)

From Aviation Week's Ares blog There's something very cool about an Apache operating in a maritime environment: So who's going to put together a 'pirate hunter' scenario using sea borne Apaches and the Middle East or South Africa battleset? Get crackin!

Halifax class frigate HMCS Charlottetown looks to have tossed some 57mm in the direction of Qaddafi's forces yesterday: Canadian ship returns fire at Libyan forces

Now, I know plenty of folks think Sweetman is rapidly anti-JSF, but here's his take on the 2010 SAR anyway: F-35 Costs: A Bit of Reality (from Aviation Week's Ares blog) If you can pick holes in what he's saying, I'd like to hear about it. I'm interested in something rather elusive at times, the 'truth' (don't tell me I can't handle it. )

If I understand correctly, there was no SAR specifically for the F-35 JSF in 2009 (nor for several major USAF programs), but rather a news release from DOD on April 1, 2010 that accompanied a collection of other SAR's and which included information specifically relevant to JSF, namely:

Not to interfere with the work ongoing in this thread, but kudos to Tony for taking the time to try and figure out what is obviously (even to the untrained eye) an odd one. You're in good hands, Akron.

It will be 'interesting' to see if local (Canadian) media pick up on the 2010 SAR disclosure prior to the Milestone B review due for sometime later this month, particularly as the current DND estimates of cost and schedule are based on the 2009 SAR. And, moreover, if the Milestone B review proves more optimistic or, as the folks at AvWeek are calling it, a sign of "Acquisition Armageddon". Yes, the drop below the threshold minimum for F-35A combat radius (to 584 nm) is disappointing.

Even if enough firm interest is shown, and experience shows that's a big IF, it will take months to work up to a start date.

F-35 Selected Acquisition Report (SAR), 31 December 2010

HCDB-110512 Aircraft: F-104G Starfighter - FRG F35 Draken - Denmark MH-60 Dark Hawk - USA RF35 Draken - Denmark Installations: Compound - Intl Ships: Gerald R. Ford CVN - USA

A new version of the official Harpoon Commander's Edition (HCE) Database (HCDB-110512) is now available. Get the new DB in the Downloads section. New additions (or overhauls of existing entries) include: Aircraft: F-104G Starfighter - FRG F35 Draken - Denmark MH-60 Dark Hawk - USA RF35 Draken - Denmark Installations: Compound - Intl Ships: Gerald R. Ford CVN - USA Enjoy.

Kola Strike There are two flavours of this scenario, one taking place in June 1980 and the other in June 1988. Either way, the scenario models a two carrier US Navy attack on the Kola Peninsula, and more particularly, five key shore bases and facilities of the Red Banner Northern Fleet. Whether the 1980 or 1988 scenario is chosen will determine in particular the order of battle (as well as the weapons available). In 1980, for the US Navy: A force centred on the USS Nimitz and USS John F Kennedy carrying air wings with F-14A, A-7E, A-6E, etc. And the Soviet defense: SA-3 SAMs, various AAA, Su-15 Flagon, MiG-23MLD Flogger K and Tu-128 Fiddler B fighters. In 1988, for the US Navy: A force centred on the USS Forrestal and USS Theodore Roosevelt, carrying air wings with F-14A, F/A-18A, A-7E and A-6E, etc; as well as two Improved LA class submarines with TLAMs. And the Soviet defense: SA-11 SAMs, various AAA, Su-27 Flanker and Su-15 Flagon fighters with potential for MiG-31 Foxhound and/or MiG-25 Foxbat to also appear. Points are scored by NATO destroying a certain amount of Soviet infrastructure (measured in DP). The Soviets win by a successful defense that keeps the damage to a minimum.